UNCAT Ratification Tool
Annex 1: When to ratify UNCAT and
OPCAT?
There is no requirement to fully comply with the UN Convention against Torture or its Optional
Protocol prior to ratification or accession. Nevertheless, States have typically been wary to ratify or
accede before they can demonstrate that they have fulfilled many, if not all, of their obligations.
Experience has shown that this belief is common to States seeking to adopt various human rights
treaties.
“There is a common misconception, in the Pacific region and elsewhere,
that full compliance with treaty provisions is a pre‐requisite for ratification.
This is not true. In fact, no country in the world manages full compliance.
There is always room for improvement. Ratification should signal the
beginning of a process to amend national legislation so that it conforms to
international human rights standards. States should not regard their
current domestic human rights situation as a barrier to treaty ratification.
Instead, ratification should be seen as an opportunity to effect change.”5
At the first Forum of the Convention against Torture Initiative (CTI), held in September 2014,
participants asked UN experts whether States should ratify immediately, or wait until after they have
overcome implementation challenges. UN experts, including members of the UN Committee against
Torture, explained that the Convention does not expect States to be in full compliance with its
provisions prior to ratification.
During the process of periodic review with States parties, the Committee against Torture does not
expect full compliance from States under review, but rather that a process is being undertaken
towards satisfying those obligations. Indeed, it is often only after ratification, through cooperative
5
OHCHR Regional Office for the Pacific, Ratification of International Human Rights Treaties: Added value for the
Pacific Region (OHCHR/PIFS, 2009).
10
Select target paragraph3
Connect to a paragraph
Connect to an entity
Disable highlights
Add to table of contents